Putin, Trump, and Deutsche Bank.

On 9 January, 2019, I wrote that,

"One can now safely say that Angela Merkel, together with the German business community is, and always has been, covering Putin's economic back, irrespective of Gazprom being a critical factor in Putin's war with Ukraine!

The completion of the Nord Stream2 project is now more critical for Putin as the US House of Congress begins to block Trump's attempt to remove US sanctions against Putin and his 'siloviki' clique." (cf. also Alan Rappeport above)

How long, now, will Merkel be able to continue with her pretense that Nord Stream2 is a purely economic relationship between herself and Putin? (Blog Entry 9 January, 2019)

Recent events in the banking world of Germany further underscores the degree and extent to which Putinversteher Angela Merkel will go to cover Putin's, and his Kremlin 'siloviki's', economic back.

I refer, of course, to the current scrabble by Merkel to save Deutsche Bank, the favoured German bank of Trump, Putin, and the Kremlin 'siloviki'

As reported by Matthew Lynn (left),

"Over the last few years, the Germans, the European Central Bank, and the EU itself, have been adamant that banks shouldn’t be bailed out inside the eurozone. Along the way, Greek, Cypriot, Italian and Irish banks have all been allowed to go to the wall or squeezed to extinction.
...
But hold on. There seems to be an exception to that austere financial regime. Big German banks. With the once mighty Deutsche Bank in serious trouble, it turns out there is nothing wrong with the [German] government orchestrating what amounts to a rescue after all." (The Spectator : 19 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

Matthew Lynn goes on to state that,

" ... That lays bare a stark truth about the eurozone, and indeed the EU. There is one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else." (ibid Matthew Lynn)

Arthur Sullivan perhaps best sums up WHY Merkel believes there is one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else. He reports that,

"Deutsche Bank's problems have been even more pronounced. On top of its dire financial performance — it made a net loss of €6 billion between 2011 and 2018 — it has been bogged down with several major scandals, including the Libor scandal, where fraudulent manipulation of interest rates took place for years, and the ongoing money laundering probe into Danske Bank." (DW : 10 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

This  "one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else", is also true in the case of Nord Stream 2, Putin's desperate attempt to ensure its completion so that he will not have to pay into Ukraine's coffers for sending gas to the EU through Ukraine's gas pipelines.

Recall that in February of this year,

"Under a deal agreed earlier in February, the [Nord Stream 2] pipeline must meet four EU rules, including a telecoms-style unbundling requirement whereby other suppliers be allowed access to the pipeline.

However, Germany will be the ultimate arbiter of how the regulations are applied. " (Adam Vaughan:The Guardian : 25 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

Recent revelations in the US have, however, opened up a can of worms for Germany's Deutsche Bank.

The intimate links between Deutsche Bank and Putin and Trump is now revealing just how Trump was (and still is) possibly on Putin's payroll.

As reported by Chris Matthews (right),

"The House Intelligence Committee is now seeking to determine whether President Trump is currently under the influence of the Kremlin. .... the president may be compromised by his possible financial entanglements with Russia ..." (MSNBC : 19 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

David Enrich further reveals just how Deutsche Bank poured money into the Trump coffers whilst knowing that NO US bank would loan Trump any money.

Is this how Putin siphoned money into the Trump coffers and ensnared him?

More importantly, we have to ask the question,

"In having to now bail out Deutsche Bank, contrary to EU banking regulations, just how far will Merkel go to cover Putin's economic back, and at the expense of Ukraine?"

Without Deutsche Bank, what would happen to the already parlous state of the Russian economy?

Would Putin be able to continue pouring money into Ukraine's Crimea whilst the Russian people have to endure rising economic hardships?

As Paul Goble (left) writes,

"The USSR fell apart as a result of a whole list of problems. Crimea too can become precisely that point of no return” about which future historians will speak.  And they will view the annexation of Crimea not as a victory to be celebrated but as a curse that should have been avoided." (Window on Eurasia : 18 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

(to be continued)

Like Trump, Putin is now trapped in a dangerous situation of his own making.

As the Ukrainian presidential elections loom ever closer, Mykola Vorobiov (left) reports that,

"Expectations are high that Russia will attempt to interfere in the upcoming Ukrainian presidential elections, scheduled for March 31.
...
Having failed, since 2014, to force Kyiv back into its orbit using purely military means, the Kremlin has been gearing up a broad spectrum of instruments—including cyberattacks, disinformation, courting of pro-Russian politicians and their supporters, inflaming of religious tensions, as well as threats of further military escalation—in order to put pressure on Ukraine via its democratic process. (Jamestown : 11 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

And as Putin ramps up his attack on Ukraine's democratic process, Rikard Jozwiak reports that,

"The United States, together with the European Union and Canada, imposed new sanctions on March 15 on more than a dozen Russian officials and businesses in response to the country's "continued aggression in Ukraine." (RFERL : 15 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

Added to which,

"NATO has again confirmed future membership for Ukraine in the Alliance, noting strengthened political and practical support for Kyiv since illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia and events in Donbas.

This message was delivered in the annual report by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (left), which was released on Thursday at NATO headquarters in Brussels." (KyivPost : 14 March,2019) (my emphasis)

Perhaps of even more significance,

"Denmark’s foreign minister [Anders Samuelsen (right)] said Wednesday his country hasn’t yet decided whether to allow a joint German-Russian gas pipeline [Nord Stream 2] to pass through its territorial waters, but suggested Moscow’s continued aggression in Ukraine was making it less likely to be approved." (Associated Press : 6 March, 2019) (my emphasis)


So whilst Putinversteher Merkel is trying to strong-arm the EU into accepting Nord Stream 2, little Denmark is not willing to succumb to her strong-arm tactics.

Adding to Putin's woes, Roman Goncharenko writes that,

"Today, a sense of disappointment and frustration pervades the country [Russia]. And the Kremlin has not yet found a way of boosting approval ratings.
...
There is no more public debate over whether Crimea truly belongs to Ukraine or Russia. Even though back in 2014 most Russians did not really question the annexation of the peninsula, either. Konstantin Gaase says that now, "even the Russian opposition has stopped talking about Crimea." (DW : 15 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

As more and more frustrations are piled up on Putin, the real danger that this poses is that he will lash out against Ukraine.

Recall that in 2014, Angela Merkel herself stated that she was,

" .... bewildered by the man in charge of one of the world’s largest countries. After speaking with Mr Putin, she said she was not sure he was in touch with reality." (Daniel Piotrwoski (right): News AU: 5 March, 2014)

Merkel's tune about Putin's state-of-mind has somewhat changed since then, now that the German-Russian Nord stream 2 pipeline promises to make Germany the gas-hub of Europe.

                                                            Merkel and Putin                       Putin and Schröder

(Former German Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, currently serves as a board member of several consortia, including the Nord Stream 2 consortium, in which Russian-government-controlled energy company Gazprom is either the majority or sole shareholder.)

As the thorn of Ukraine digs deeper into the wilting Russian economy of Putin, will Putin's 'itchy' finger press the button that will unleash his armed forces bordering Ukraine's border, and those now in Ukraine's Crimea, against Ukraine?

Recall that in 2014, "While lounging in a chair like a world-weary aristrocrat, [Putin] insisted Russia was seeking to de-escalate tensions [with Ukraine]. But his speech came as Russian troops fired warning shots at Ukrainian soldiers and Russia fired a nuclear capable missile." (ibid Daniel Piotrwoski)

As Roman Goncharenko writes,

"Today (2019), a sense of disappointment and frustration pervades the country [Russia]. And the Kremlin has not yet found a way of boosting approval ratings."

Like Trump, Putin is now trapped in a dangerous situation of his own making.

(to be continued)

Will Putin's 'itchy' nuclear finger unleash the unthinkable?

In my blog entry of (19 Jan., 2019), I wrote that,

"Let us cast our minds back to July of 2014, when Sergey Lavrov, that dyed-in-the-wool Soviet Foreign minister, stated that,

"If it comes to aggression against Russian territory, which Sevastopol and Crimea are parts of, I would not advise anyone to do this".

He then added, "We have the doctrine of national security, and it very clearly regulates the actions, which will be taken in this case".

This is a not-so-subtle threat to use nuclear weapons to retain Crimea" (Zachary Keck : The Diplomat : 11 July, 2014) (my emphasis)

In March of 2015 it was also reported that,

"President Vladimir Putin has said he was ready to put Russia's nuclear weapons on standby during tensions over the crisis in Ukraine and Crimea." (BBC News : 15 March, 2015) (my emphasis) (blog entry : 19 Jan., 2019)

 And in January of this year (2019), Joe Gamp reported that,

"RUSSIA has deployed an arsenal of nuclear-capable missiles close to the border of Ukraine - stoking further tensions between the two Crimean adversaries following an incident on the Sea of Azov in November." (Express : 20 January, 2019) (my emphasis)

Those missiles are NOW on standby since, as reported by UNIAN,

"Chief of the General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces Gen. Viktor Muzhenko (right) has announced that Russia is completing the formation of its strike force on the border with Ukraine, which together with special-operations units will form the base for the Kremlin's invasion fist." (UNIAN : 6 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

It is not only Gen. Muzhenko that is raising the red flag of Putin's imminent attempt to invade Ukraine.

As reported by Will Stewart,

"A famed woman tank commander fighting for pro-Vladimir Putin rebels has revealed Russia’s secret plan to place 100,000 ground troops inside Ukraine in just four hours after she defected to the country.
...
Svetlana Dryuk , 40, says she has handed Kiev details of Russian battle plans for a “full-scale invasion” of  Ukraine." (Express : 4 March, 2019) (my emphasis)  

Putin has, however, to weigh the cost to Russia of any invasion of Ukraine against the stand of the UK, NATO, and the US, to assist Ukraine in such an eventuality.

Recall that in November of 2018, Luke Hawker reported that,

"THE UK will expand its military presence in the Ukraine as tensions increase with Russia, the Defence Secretary will announce today. Britain will be sending additional troops and a Royal Navy ship into eastern Europe “as long as Ukraine faces Russian hostilities”." (Express : 21 November, 2018) (my emphasis)

Recall also that in 2015, a year after the Maidan revolution that overthrew Yanukovich, the BBC reported that,

"Nato warships have begun military training exercises in the Black Sea, in international waters off the coast of Bulgaria.

The mission is aimed at reassuring its members in Eastern Europe in the face of Russia's increasingly unpredictable behaviour. " (BBC : 11 March, 2015) (my emphasis)

And today, as reported by UKRINFORM,

"A group of NATO ships will enter the Black Sea in a few days to conduct exercises as part of the build-up of the presence of the Alliance forces in the region.
...
"The Allies clearly stated that Russia's aggressive actions against Ukraine are unacceptable, as well as the annexation of Crimea, the continuation of attempts to destabilize Ukraine by the presence in Donbas, and the illegal capture of Ukrainian ships and sailors," [NATO Secretary General Jens] Stoltenberg (right) said. (UKRINFORM : 7 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

In light of these NATO exercises, Ciaran McGrath reports that,

"RUSSIA has issued an ominous threat after NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg revealed plans to beef up its military presence in the Black Sea - warning such a move had the potential to aggravate still further simmering tensions in the region." (Express : 15 February, 2019) (my emphasis),

 whilst at the same time, [Russia's] Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko is being somewhat more conciliatory, stating that,

"The Black Sea has always been the sea of cooperation, even taking into account certain conflicts." (ibid Ciaran McGrath)

This 'conciliatory stance of Alexander Grushko could also be due to the fact that, as reported by Cristina Maza (right), Mark Simakovsky argues that,

“I think the Kerch Strait incident showcased not only the continued threat to Ukraine but also the deficiencies of the Ukrainian coast guard and Navy in terms of their capabilities,” Mark Simakovsky, an expert on Russia and NATO at the D.C.-based Atlantic Council, told Newsweek.
...
“So this is an ongoing issue...The U.S. can and should continue to provide defense assistance, and actually accelerate defense assistance, to Ukraine and broaden it beyond the focus on anti-armor and anti-air capabilities and counter battery radar." (Newsweek : 6 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

It could also be due to the fact that, as reported by Bill McLoughlin,


"US Army General Curtis Saparrotti (left) revealed to Congress that there had been “numerous ceasefire violations” [in Ukraine] by Russia. In light of that, General Scaparrotti revealed that he had requested two addition naval destroyers in order to “remain dominant in the maritime domain” ahead of Russia." (Express : 7 March, 2019) (my emphasis)

We should, however, be mindful of Putin's constant 'nuclear' sabre rattling.

As recently reported by Hollie McKay,

"Putin’s speech [last month (Feb. 2019)] to the Federal Assembly indeed “included some serious saber-rattling about Russia’s intentions to field new weaponry –  including nuclear-powered cruise missiles, nuclear-powered unmanned submarines and hypersonic ballistic missiles to name a few.” (Fox News : 21 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

Will Putin's 'itchy' nuclear finger unleash the unthinkable?

(to be continued)

Can Putin survive the continual decline of the Russian economy?

Tatiana Jancarikova (left) reported (7 February, 2019) that Angela Merkel stated that,

“Do we become dependent on Russia due to this second gas pipeline? I say ‘no’, if we diversify at the same time,” Merkel told a news conference in Bratislava, where she met the leaders of the Visegrad group - Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia.

Diplomatic sources have said Germany is pressuring other European capitals to block an EU proposal to regulate Nord Stream 2 ahead of a key meeting on Friday but may fail to convince France, threatening the project’s construction." (Reuters : 7 Feb., 2019) (my emphasis)

Since that statement of Putinversteher Merkel, she has finally managed to convince Macron to agree to the Nord Steam 2 project.

But here comes the rub! 

As reported by Adam Vaughan,

"... this month a compromise deal on pipeline rules was forged by Germany and France, which should allow the scheme to proceed.

Under a deal agreed earlier in February, the pipeline must meet four EU rules, including a telecoms-style unbundling requirement whereby other suppliers be allowed access to the pipeline.

However, Germany will be the ultimate arbiter of how the regulations are applied. " (The Guardian : 25 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

It would seem that BOTH Merkel and Macron must be woefully ignorant of just how Putin's invasion and annexation of Ukraine's Crimea was also, in effect, a resource grab.

As reported by Ariel Cohen (left),

"There are nine so-called “blocks” of natural gas available for licensing in Ukraine’s Black Sea, the potential of which ranges from 92 billion cubic meters (bcm) to over 500 bcm, according to an April 2018 survey conducted by Deloitte.
...
Moscow’s intent to exploit Ukraine’s natural gas deposits is not just idle speculation; it is currently underway. When Russian forces annexed Crimea in 2014, they seized subsidiaries of Ukraine’s state energy conglomerate Naftogaz operating in the Black Sea. The Kremlin appropriated these companies — and billions of dollars of equipment — and delivered them to Gazprom, Russia’s state-owned energy giant. In one fell swoop, Russia ended Ukraine’s offshore oil and gas operations and bolstered its own." (Forbes : 28 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

The compromised Nord Stream 2 deal forged between Merkel and Macron, with Merkel being the  ultimate arbiter of how the regulations are applied, once again emphasizes just how Merkel is indirectly bankrolling Putin at the expense of Ukraine.

Once Nord Stream 2 becomes operational at the end of this year Putin, with the help of Merkel, and now also Macron, will effectively be in near total control of Ukraine's energy needs.

All of this puts into stark perspective just why Putin is now flooding the Black Sea with his warships and submarines. 

It also puts into sharp perspective the critical importance of Ukraine's upcoming presidential elections.

We should also bear in mind Putin's nuclear missiles that now face Ukraine from Putin's annexed Ukraine's Crimea, not to mention the veritable Russian army on the Russian-Ukrainian border.

The 'fly in Putin's ointment' is still, however, those pesky EU and US sanctions that is causing Russia's economy to stutter and decline.  

Putin's 'Manchurian Candidate', Donald Trump, is now clinging by his fingertips onto his presidency as more is revealed not only about the collusion between himself and Putin during the 2016 US presidential elections, but also about Trump's criminal mind-set.

So, whilst Putin may be gleeful about Merkel and Macron giving Nord Stream 2 the 'green light', as reported by Marek Dabrowski and Antoine Mathieu Collin (right)

"The weak growth prospects [of the Russian economy] are caused by several factors including:

(i) adverse demographic trends – a declining working-age population and ageing of the population; (ii) a poor business and investment climate;
(iii) difficulty in diversifying away from the dominant role of the hydrocarbon sector;
(iv) Western sanctions on Russia in response to the annexation of Crimea and Russian support for separatists in the eastern Ukraine Donbas region, and Russian counter-sanctions." (Bruegel : 7 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

Can Putin survive the continual decline of the Russian economy?

(to be continued)

Swedish Defense Agency announces that Russia is preparing for a full-scale war

When the Swedish Defense Agency announces that Russia is preparing for a full-scale war, one should sit up and take notice.

As reported by the FOI (Swedish Defense Agency),

"Russian military exercises have become increasingly extensive during the last ten years, according to a report from FOI. Although Russia previously focused on managing small-scale conflicts, it now practices how to start and conduct large-scale war.
...
During the last ten years, the country has used military force in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria.
“Russia is obviously prepared to use military means. It is thus important to understand how, and in the worst case, for what, they might be used. Military exercises provide a hint of this,” says Johan Norberg." (FOI : 4 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

That Putin is now faced with the the only option of escalating his war with Ukraine is significantly due to the fact that, as reported by Keith Johnson,

"This Friday in Brussels, the Council of the European Union will vote on a seemingly arcane directive meant to apply European Union market rules to energy projects that start in a third country—like the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia.


... France has now decided to back the directive. That risks angering Germany—which really wanted to build the pipeline with Russia—and potentially dooming the $11 billion energy project, a priority for Russian President Vladimir Putin." (Foreign Policy : 8 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

As also reported by John Irish and Sudip Kar-Gupta (left),

"France expects to support a revised directive on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project, said the country’s foreign ministry on Thursday, adding it was working with partners including Germany on possible changes to a text on the matter. (Right: French President Macron)

Germany has been pressuring other European capitals to block [this] EU proposal to regulate Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline ahead of a key meeting on Friday, diplomatic sources have said." (Reuters : 7 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

Added to which,

“Poland views the Nord Stream 2 as a significant threat to the peace and security on the European continent from the point of view of deepening European countries’ dependence on Russian energy and the prospects for an escalation of Russian aggression against Ukraine,” Polish Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz (left) said late last month." (Keith Johnson : Foreign Policy : 7 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

And compounding Putin's current woes,

"Eighteen European Union member states have called on the bloc to be "ready to act" in support of Ukraine in case Russian tries to undermine the country's presidential and parliamentary elections later this year, according to a document seen by Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (RFE/RL)." (UNIAN : 7 February, 2019) (my emphasis)

As I stated in a recent blog entry (30 Jan., 2019),

"Since his methods of election-interference during the 2016 US presidential elections have being publicly exposed, Putin is well aware that the international public will be on the look-out for his interference in the upcoming elections in Ukraine.

This weapon, which he so successfully wielded in the 2016 US presidential elections, has [now] been blunted." (Blog : 30 January, 2019)

On the other side of the Atlantic pond, as Putin and Merkel loose sleep over the possible collapse of the Putin-German Nord Stream 2 pipeline completion, the inextricable links of collusion between Putin, his 'siloviki', and Donald Trump, during the 2016 US presidential elections, continues to emerge.

MSNBC (8 February, 2019)

Putin's 'payback' expectations from Trump for helping him gain the keys to the White House has simply not materialized.

On the contrary, the public exposure by the Mueller investigation of the Putin-Trump 'love-fest' is now gaining momentum in propelling Trump towards the gallows of impeachment.

Putin's 'Manchurian Candidate', Donald Trump, is now reaching the stage of near total meltdown, as so many working in the West Wing of the White House, are now experiencing.

MSNBC (6 February, 2019)

No longer can Putin now rely on Trump to simply dutifully obey his orders.

The Democratic Party now controls the US House of Congress and, unlike the previous Republicans who, during their control of the US Congress, simply rubber-stamped Trump's 'love-fest' with Putin, are now exercising their duty of 'oversight' over the White House.

  

And the European Council is now exercising its duty of 'oversight' over, "... arcane directive meant to apply European Union market rules to energy projects that start in a third country—like the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia.". 

And under these circumstances, "When the Swedish Defense Agency announces that Russia is preparing for a full-scale war, one should sit up and take notice."

(to be continued)

Has Putin been inadvertently given the "nuclear go-ahead" against Ukraine by Trump?

In my blog entry of (19 Jan., 2019), I wrote that,

"Let us cast our minds back to July of 2014, when Sergey Lavrov, that dyed-in-the-wool Soviet Foreign minister, stated that,

"If it comes to aggression against Russian territory, which Sevastopol and Crimea are parts of, I would not advise anyone to do this".

He then added, "We have the doctrine of national security, and it very clearly regulates the actions, which will be taken in this case".

This is a not-so-subtle threat to use nuclear weapons to retain Crimea" (Zachary Keck : The Diplomat : 11 July, 2014) (my emphasis)

In March of 2015 it was also reported that,

"President Vladimir Putin has said he was ready to put Russia's nuclear weapons on standby during tensions over the crisis in Ukraine and Crimea." (BBC News : 15 March, 2015) (my emphasis) (blog entry : 19 Jan., 2019)

Fast forward to yesterday (2 Feb., 2019), and UNIAN reports that,

"Speaker for the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine Oleksiy Chernobay (left) has said the Russian Federation deployed 12 Iskander nuclear-capable ballistic missile launchers at a distance of 250 km from the border of Ukraine." (UNIAN : 2 Feb., 2019) (my emphasis)

This deployment of nuclear-capable ballistic missile launchers so close to Ukraine's border comes against the backdrop that,

"... Russia [has] deployed at least 28 battalion tactical groups near the Ukrainian border.

At least 28 battalion tactical groups are in readiness for immediate use on the border with our state. They are 100% staffed by contract servicemen and equipped with modern (modernized) weapons and military hardware," [Oleksiy Chernobay] told UNIAN about Russia's military presence along the border with Ukraine" (UNIAN : 2 Feb., 2019) (my emphasis)

More significantly, as outlined by Andreas Umlan (right),

1. [T]he West’s lack of reaction to the November 2018 naval confrontation. The West has done little beyond condemning the aggression ..
2. The EU has not reacted and probably will not react materially, as it did after the shoot down of Malaysia Airlines flight 17 in July 2014 to the confrontation and capture of Ukrainian sailors either.
3. The absence of any relevant international organizations on the Azov Sea or on Crimea makes Russian actions against Ukraine there less risky
4.  Since its opening in May 2018, there have been repeated reports in the Ukrainian media about the [Kerch] bridge’s engineering issues and geological challenges
5. In 2014, Kyiv stopped the delivery of water to the peninsula via the North Crimean Canal. Constantly declining aquatic reserves, in combination with a continuing dearth of energy supply, are a virtual time bomb with potentially far-reaching economic and social consequences for Crimea’s residents. (The Atlantic : 1st February, 2019) (my emphasis)

And then we have NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg (left) stating that,

“NATO does not have any intention to deploy new land-based nuclear weapons to Europe,” Stoltenberg said in an interview in the Norwegian capital.

“We don’t have to mirror what Russia does. But at the same time we have to make sure that we maintain credible and effective deterrence,” he said, without giving specifics on what the different military options NATO is looking at could entail." (Reuters : 1st February, 2019) (my emphasis)

This statement of Stoltenberg comes hot on the heels of Trump suddenly announcing, on the SAME day (1st February, 2019), that the US is pulling out of the INF Treaty,

"We can't be put at the disadvantage of going by a treaty, limiting what we do, when somebody else does not go by that treaty ..." (Eliot Engel and Adam Smith : CNN : 2nd February, 2019) (my emphasis)

As Engel and Smith point out,

"Russia is now violating the INF treaty by developing and deploying new missiles that could deliver nuclear warheads to European targets, including US military bases. This dangerous situation demands a robust and effective response. Instead, the Trump administration has played right into Vladimir Putin's hands." (ibid Engel and Smith) (my emphasis)

Putin now has carte blanche to deploy as many Iskander nuclear-capable ballistic missile launchers along Russia's border with Ukraine, as well as in Ukraine's annexed Crimea.

(to be continued)

Is war with Ukraine now Putin's only weapon against Ukraine that he has in his armoury?

In November of last year, Tucker Higgins reported that,

"Senior Russian officials publicly chided (video below) U.S. President Donald Trump following his announcement on Thursday that he would no longer meet with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin during the G-20 summit of world leaders in Argentina.

 Russians Chiding Trump for cancelling meeting with Putin (YouTube)

Trump announced the cancellation via Twitter, citing Russia's seizure of two Ukrainian gunboats and a tugboat in the Kerch Strait, a shared zone which sits between Ukraine and Russia. He said his decision "would be best for all parties concerned." (CNBC : Fri, 30 Nov 2018) (my emphasis)

It now transpires that Trump did, indeed, have a very private tête-à-tête with Putin, with only Melania Trump (left) and a Russian translator present.

No American officials were present at this 15+ minute "private" chat between Trump and Putin, so why Melania ?

Is it just possible that Melania has a basic understanding of Russian, and that Trump wanted her "private translation" after this meeting?

As Rachel Maddow also states,

"What do you do , as a National Security matter, with the fact that the President, apparently, still insists on maintaining, effectively, a secret line of communication with the Kremlin?" (MSNBC : 29 Jan., 2019) (my emphasis)

What is significant about this meeting is the fact that Trump publicly stated that the reason for him cancelling a meeting between himself and Putin at the G20 Summit was,

"...Russia's seizure of two Ukrainian gunboats and a tugboat in the Kerch Strait, a shared zone which sits between Ukraine and Russia." (cf. Tucker Higgins)

Yet again has the "Scarlet Thread of  Maidan", that tightly binds Trump and Putin together, surfaced.
 
It has now also emerged that US Congress-woman Jackie Speer has revealed that US Treasury Secretary, Steve Mnuchin, had a financial relationship with Leonid Blavatnik, who also has a BIG STAKE in the Rusal Aluminium company of Oleg Deripaska (right), against which sanctions were recently lifted. (MSNBC : 29 Jan., 2019)

As Congress-woman Jackie Speer (left) states,

"... Leonid Blavatnik is a significant shareholder in Rusal, which is Deripaska's company. That company, once sanctions were imposed, dropped like a stone. Once the sanctions were lifted, it increased by some 24% in terms of the stock price." (MSNBC : 29 Jan., 2019) (my emphasis)

So the popping of champagne corks by Deripaska, as US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin lifted the US sanctions on Rusal, may be rather short lived.

Given the closeness of the friendship between Putin and Deripaska, (and Putin and Trump), is it possible that the re-instatement of sanctions against Deripaska's companies, and the revealing of that "private conversation" between Trump and Putin at the G20 Summit, may push Putin over the edge to invade Ukraine?

Or is Putin now more determined that ever to emasculate the upcoming presidential elections in Ukraine ,

"... Hoping to remove Petro Poroshenko from top office in Ukraine and aiming to bring to power a less anti-Russian parliament, the report says, Russia seeks to exploit such issues existing in Ukraine as unsustainable economy, widespread corruption, cyber vulnerabilities, and public discontent." (UNIAN : 29 Jan., 2019) (my emphasis)

Putin continues to keep his war with Ukraine simmering, as evidenced by the fact that,

"Russian-led forces mounted eight attacks on Ukrainian troops in Donbas, eastern Ukraine, in the past 24 hours." (UNIAN : 30 Jan., 2019) (my emphasis)

Since his methods of election-interference during the 2016 US presidential elections have being publicly exposed, Putin is well aware that the international public will be on the look-out for his interference in the upcoming elections in Ukraine.

This weapon, which he so successfully wielded in the 2016 US presidential elections, has been blunted.

So the question remains,

"Is war with Ukraine now Putin's only weapon against Ukraine that he has in his armoury?"

 

(to be continued)